To build or not build a wall

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Jan 10, 2019 6:52 am

Let me ask... Why was God interested an a wall (Nehemiah) being built?

One lesson we can learn is that God wanted to keep the enemy out and protect His own people.

Walls are not our enemy... But walls can keep the enemy at bay.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Dave Roberts » Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:00 am

Why then do the walls of heaven have gates that are never closed?
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7343
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Haruo » Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:04 am

Why do I doubt that either of these proof texts applies to Trump's (or the Democrats') notion of what to do with the Rio Grande and adjacent turf?

In 2006 the Democratic-majority Senate passed a bill to build a 700-mile "wall" or "fence" or "barrier" or whatever you want to call it along significant portions of the US-Mexico border, citing reasoning very similar to what Trump has been citing for building one the entire length of that border. Now Trump has decided that having it his way is more important than paying his employees for their critically needed services, and the Democrats have decided that having it Trump's way (or to listen to some of them, having any wall) is worth not paying the workforce to avoid.

Both sides are full of hyperbole (a very biblical thing to be full of) and the nation is being ill served (and the workers even more illy).

I was amazed at how well Trump stuck to his Teleprompter night before last. If I didn't know better I might have mistaken him for Obama.

In 2013, "Obama shut down the government" for almost this long to force the adoption of the Affordable Care Act.*

I'm less than impressed with the lot of them, and with the press or whatever it's called that feeds us our views of the facts.

* Depending on which Fact Checker you go with, this is rated True, Half True, or Not True. Wait, that was Ted Cruz, not Barack?
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12346
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Rvaughn » Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:49 pm

Haruo wrote:In 2013, "Obama shut down the government" for almost this long to force the adoption of the Affordable Care Act.*

* Depending on which Fact Checker you go with, this is rated True, Half True, or Not True. Wait, that was Ted Cruz, not Barack?
Not accurate regarding the adoption of ACA. (ACA was adopted in 2010.) It was about the funding of it in 2013. Most will support the side with which they agree, and blame the side with which they disagree. The truth is that the shut down occurred because the House, Senate, and President could not or would not agree about what to do. The same is true currently re the wall. We can be for it or against it (or not care), but the lack of agreement of all parties is ultimately what forces a shutdown.
Haruo wrote:I'm less than impressed with the lot of them, and with the press or whatever it's called that feeds us our views of the facts.
If less than impressed means disgusted :-), I say amen and amen!
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:03 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:Why then do the walls of heaven have gates that are never closed?


They are closed to many. They also are very narrow.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:04 pm

Haruo wrote:Why do I doubt that either of these proof texts applies to Trump's (or the Democrats') notion of what to do with the Rio Grande and adjacent turf?

In 2006 the Democratic-majority Senate passed a bill to build a 700-mile "wall" or "fence" or "barrier" or whatever you want to call it along significant portions of the US-Mexico border, citing reasoning very similar to what Trump has been citing for building one the entire length of that border. Now Trump has decided that having it his way is more important than paying his employees for their critically needed services, and the Democrats have decided that having it Trump's way (or to listen to some of them, having any wall) is worth not paying the workforce to avoid.

Both sides are full of hyperbole (a very biblical thing to be full of) and the nation is being ill served (and the workers even more illy).

I was amazed at how well Trump stuck to his Teleprompter night before last. If I didn't know better I might have mistaken him for Obama.

In 2013, "Obama shut down the government" for almost this long to force the adoption of the Affordable Care Act.*

I'm less than impressed with the lot of them, and with the press or whatever it's called that feeds us our views of the facts.

* Depending on which Fact Checker you go with, this is rated True, Half True, or Not True. Wait, that was Ted Cruz, not Barack?


My point was that walls do work... even when the left says they don’t.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Dave Roberts » Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:52 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:Why then do the walls of heaven have gates that are never closed?


They are closed to many. They also are very narrow.


I don't see that description in Revelation 21:25. Guess you suffer from conflation. :)
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7343
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Sandy » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:49 pm

Jon Estes wrote:My point was that walls do work... even when the left says they don’t.


The left doesn't say walls don't work, any more than they are advocating for open borders. They are saying that Trump's proposal for a border wall is an unnecessary boondoggle and waste of the taxpayers money and point to evidence that supports their statement.

Border security was a problem from the Bush administration. The Obama administration beefed up the border patrol and enforcement. They expanded the fences and barricades in areas where most illegal crossings were happening, increased surveillance, put many more officers on duty and, presto, the number of illegals apprehended went up and ultimately the number of attempted illegal crossings went down, to near-record lows. The DHS, now under the Trump administration, reports similar statistics which indicate that there is no crisis on the southern border. Most apprehensions now take place in the towns and cities where the ports of entry are located. The whole idea of a wall is nothing more than a way to satisfy his base who think that building one will work, in spite of evidence to the contrary and in spite of the fact that border wall would be symbolically unAmerican. A border barricade is a communist idea that they tried in Berlin for a while, a wall that is a negative image of the concept of "border security."

Trump said publicly he was willing to take responsibility for a government shutdown over border security and even though he wavered for a while, he appears to be fairly firm at the moment. Some of his fellow Republicans don't seem to be as confident or sure about this as he is.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby JE Pettibone » Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:54 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:Why then do the walls of heaven have gates that are never closed?


They are closed to many. They also are very narrow.


I don't see that description in Revelation 21:25. Guess you suffer from conflation. :)


Ed: Dave, perhaps you need to continue on to Rev 26 and 27. Although the gates to heaven may always be open, not all who seek entry are granted admission.

Also Trump nor any one I have heard advocating for a wall on our southern border suggest that it should be without gates.
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:48 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby JE Pettibone » Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:28 pm

Hauro wrote in part "Now Trump has decided that having it his way is more important than paying his employees for their critically needed services, and the Democrats have decided that having it Trump's way (or to listen to some of them, having any wall) is worth not paying the workforce to avoid.

Ed: Hauro, here you exaggerate what Trump has decided. He has decided that some of our federal employees pay will be held up until the Democrats decide to furnish an amount that his advisors have told him that an adequate barrier will require. The Democrats some of whom previously voted for a wall now claim any additional barrier is immoral, and seem to have decided that not paying our employees in a timely manner is indeed a moral bargaining chip.
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:48 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Sandy » Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:23 pm

JE Pettibone wrote:Hauro wrote in part "Now Trump has decided that having it his way is more important than paying his employees for their critically needed services, and the Democrats have decided that having it Trump's way (or to listen to some of them, having any wall) is worth not paying the workforce to avoid.

Ed: Hauro, here you exaggerate what Trump has decided. He has decided that some of our federal employees pay will be held up until the Democrats decide to furnish an amount that his advisors have told him that an adequate barrier will require. The Democrats some of whom previously voted for a wall now claim any additional barrier is immoral, and seem to have decided that not paying our employees in a timely manner is indeed a moral bargaining chip.


Democrats never voted for or approved a wall that runs the whole length of the Southern border, and that's been proven. Also, the Democrats are not the ones who said they would shut the government down if they didn't get their way. This is Trump's shutdown, and the government employees are not stupid enough to blame Democrats for it. The Democrats are, in fact, working on legislation that will prevent continuing resolutions for budget funding to be considered with other bills, to avoid future government shutdowns for any reason. I predict they'll get that through Congress with enough Republican support to override a veto.

Seems like the people who live and work along the border, including the border patrol, don't think there's a national emergency. They seem to think the current system is working just fine and there is no need for a wall and they told both of the Texas senators and Trump in McAllen today.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/presi ... spartandhp
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:38 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:Why then do the walls of heaven have gates that are never closed?


They are closed to many. They also are very narrow.


I don't see that description in Revelation 21:25. Guess you suffer from conflation. :)


That verse speaks f the New Heaven and New Earth... Different time than what we presently understand as life.

Also Trump nor any one I have heard advocating for a wall on our southern border suggest that it should be without gates.

True, but it is clear that the walls make people use the gates. Nice try.[/quote]
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:46 pm

Haruo wrote:ow Trump has decided that having it his way is more important than paying his employees for their critically needed services, and the Democrats have decided that having it Trump's way (or to listen to some of them, having any wall) is worth not paying the workforce to avoid.

That plays both ways. The money needed is minuscule to the budget and the money we spend on those who cross illegally.

I like the Acosta clip where he was showing how there was no one trying to get through the existing wall. His report actually supported that walls work.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cnns-jim-acosta-mocked-for-accidently-proving-that-border-walls-work
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Sandy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:08 am

It was made pretty clear through the reports that covered everything about Trump's visit to the border, not just the FOX news soundbytes that weren't accurate, that the BP and local law enforcement in the Rio Grande Valley aren't in favor of building a wall. Noting that most of the confiscated drugs, drug money, illegal items and apprehensions occur in the areas immediately adjacent to the ports of entry, it was pretty clear that a wall would be worthless since the areas around the ports of entry are fenced off by the same kinds of barricades that Trump is proposing be built all along the border.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/th ... c91b00c8d4

Interesting that the San Diego-Tijuana sector of the border, which has the kind of "wall" Trump wants to build, including the barbed wire at the top, is where more illegal drugs come across the border than anywhere else and while the visible migrant traffic has slowed some on the surface, one of the BP officers said that the ground in that area is like Swiss cheese.

Thought it was ironic that people were scaling the wall and coming across the border right through the construction lot where the wall models were being built. :-) .

The Washington Post wrote: .Even these big warning slabs of concrete, the teeming construction site, and police and helicopters patrolling both sides of the border weren't enough to stop a half-dozen would-be migrants from hopping the existing fence this month and landing smack in the middle of the project, according to U.S. border officials.


Mr. Acosta just wasn't around long enough. Fake news.

The solution is putting a stop to the demand for drugs. Looking at the numbers, illegal immigration is at historic lows and has been for almost a decade now. The areas where we have the tallest, strongest, firmest walls along the border are the exact places where most of the drugs are coming across. Building a wall was a campaign promise that Trump backed himself into a corner by making because he's a lousy speech maker and he likes people to cheer at his rallies and the get bored with his rambling pretty quickly so he went back to the wall. Trump is pretty inept, frankly I think his behavior and his inability to remember what he said fifteen minutes ago is a mark of genuine insanity, but his experts on border security tell him that spending that money on enforcement and on battling the source of the problem itself will be far more effective than a wall that will have a thousand tunnels under it a couple of days after it is built.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Tim Bonney » Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:14 am

Jon Estes wrote:
Walls are not our enemy... But walls can keep the enemy at bay.


First, this is horrible proof texting and has nothing whatsoever to do with the current situation on our border. The first time I heard the Pastor of FBC Dallas use it I couldn't believe he did so with a straight face. What is the point of having an "inerrant" Bible if you can then take the inerrant text and twist into any shape you want?

Second, the Central American refugees coming to our border are not our enemies. In many ways they are victims of our past policies of supporting central American dictators. But even without that they are "your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free..."

But then, in every generation there appears to be some that want to forget that we are a society of immigrants and in every generation there is some group that tries to make the immigrants out to be bad hombres be that the Catholic Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Japanese, the Mexicans, whoever. Our fearful tendencies towards nationalism in the face of changing national demographics is deeply disturbing.

The wall is more about how we have to save white America than it is about any security need and sadly evangelicals are deeply complicit in this America for whites only agenda.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6034
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Fri Jan 11, 2019 12:24 pm

Tim Bonney wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Walls are not our enemy... But walls can keep the enemy at bay.


First, this is horrible proof texting and has nothing whatsoever to do with the current situation on our border. The first time I heard the Pastor of FBC Dallas use it I couldn't believe he did so with a straight face. What is the point of having an "inerrant" Bible if you can then take the inerrant text and twist into any shape you want?

Second, the Central American refugees coming to our border are not our enemies. In many ways they are victims of our past policies of supporting central American dictators. But even without that they are "your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free..."

But then, in every generation there appears to be some that want to forget that we are a society of immigrants and in every generation there is some group that tries to make the immigrants out to be bad hombres be that the Catholic Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Japanese, the Mexicans, whoever. Our fearful tendencies towards nationalism in the face of changing national demographics is deeply disturbing.

The wall is more about how we have to save white America than it is about any security need and sadly evangelicals are deeply complicit in this America for whites only agenda.


There is an enemy and I agree most, a high majority not the enemy and are kind and needing help. Yet, because there are many among the nice who are not nice, we need to do what is right to keep the enemy out... with having the right means for those not here to get here legally. This the wall.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Sandy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 1:28 pm

Jon Estes wrote:Yet, because there are many among the nice who are not nice, we need to do what is right to keep the enemy out... with having the right means for those not here to get here legally. This the wall.


The wall is an inanimate object. It has already been proven, with visible evidence, that a wall will keep out some, but not nearly all, those who are coming as "the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to be free" while not doing a blessed thing to stop the drug traffic, which is where the criminal element comes from.

Your logic is exactly the same attitude that condemned hundreds of thousands of Jews to the furnaces of Hitler's death camps. The risk of "spies and saboteurs" entering the country with Jews fleeing the holocaust was enough to severely restrict the number of Jews allowed to enter the country. At one point, they were required to get "good conduct certificates" from local government officials in their country of origin in order to get in. So we were expecting Jews fleeing Nazi oppression to go to their local Nazi for a "good conduct certificate" so they could come to the United States. The "spies and saboteurs" argument was still in use between the invasion and occupation of France right up to the German declaration of war on the US in 1941 following Pearl Harbor, when the US could have rescued close to half a million Jews from Sweden, Spain, Portugal and Switzerland, where they had fled, in order to allow those left in Europe the chance to reach their borders. They'd already been vetted, so the neutral countries had vouched for them.

Timothy Bonney wrote:The wall is more about how we have to save white America than it is about any security need and sadly evangelicals are deeply complicit in this America for whites only agenda.


And it's that easy to see.

The worst terrorists in American history came into this country through ports of entry from Germany, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, but we don't restrict refugees or immigration from those countries. Having a wall on our southern border would not have prevented 9-11. And if we're going to put one up there, why not consider the northern boundary as well? The easiest path into the US, if denied a visa, is to go to Canada and cross the border.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Jon Estes » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:14 pm

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:Yet, because there are many among the nice who are not nice, we need to do what is right to keep the enemy out... with having the right means for those not here to get here legally. This the wall.


The wall is an inanimate object. It has already been proven, with visible evidence, that a wall will keep out some, but not nearly all, those who are coming as "the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to be free" while not doing a blessed thing to stop the drug traffic, which is where the criminal element comes from.

Your logic is exactly the same attitude that condemned hundreds of thousands of Jews to the furnaces of Hitler's death camps. The risk of "spies and saboteurs" entering the country with Jews fleeing the holocaust was enough to severely restrict the number of Jews allowed to enter the country. At one point, they were required to get "good conduct certificates" from local government officials in their country of origin in order to get in. So we were expecting Jews fleeing Nazi oppression to go to their local Nazi for a "good conduct certificate" so they could come to the United States. The "spies and saboteurs" argument was still in use between the invasion and occupation of France right up to the German declaration of war on the US in 1941 following Pearl Harbor, when the US could have rescued close to half a million Jews from Sweden, Spain, Portugal and Switzerland, where they had fled, in order to allow those left in Europe the chance to reach their borders. They'd already been vetted, so the neutral countries had vouched for them.

Timothy Bonney wrote:The wall is more about how we have to save white America than it is about any security need and sadly evangelicals are deeply complicit in this America for whites only agenda.


And it's that easy to see.

The worst terrorists in American history came into this country through ports of entry from Germany, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, but we don't restrict refugees or immigration from those countries. Having a wall on our southern border would not have prevented 9-11. And if we're going to put one up there, why not consider the northern boundary as well? The easiest path into the US, if denied a visa, is to go to Canada and cross the border.


I don’t mind the back and forth — tit for tat differences in our theologies or political stands. I don’t say anything to try to convince me to change their mind. We are all way beyond that.

A line has been crossed. To be compared to Hitler is wrong... not acceptable. That you think such is sad. That “you” would make such accusation is telling.

I have tried to bring some good things about God at work here in Dubai. Thank you all for the kind words.

But... I’m done. I don’t need to hang with, even friends, where such comparisons are made about me... or anyone else for that matter. It is a terrible ending to a good day when such a vile comparison is made, which, IMPO, makes me worse than any criminal trying to cross the border.

Please let Bruce know he will need a new moderator for this area of the site. I don’t know if I will return. At this moment I have no heart too.

Thank you all and may there be ways to discuss and debate differences without such comparisons. I don’t think they honor God.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 3:14 am

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Rvaughn » Fri Jan 11, 2019 3:56 pm

Jon Estes wrote:To be compared to Hitler is wrong... not acceptable...

Please let Bruce know he will need a new moderator for this area of the site. I don’t know if I will return. At this moment I have no heart too.
Jon, I agree that comparison is over the top, but hope you might reconsider this and not go away (if you don't stay as a moderator, at least as a contributor).

Blessings.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Haruo » Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:10 pm

Don't know if you will see this, Jon, but Sandy didn't liken you to Hitler. He was comparing your thinking and fears on the subject of dangers associated with the US-Mexican border with the thinking and fears of many Americans in the run-up to WWII whose opposition to a more open policy towards Jewish refugees fleeing Germany/Hitler was (arguably) directly complicit, albeit in most cases probably not knowingly or intentionally so, in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

His rhetoric is heated, but he did not say what you apparently thought he said about you.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12346
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Sandy » Fri Jan 11, 2019 7:29 pm

Jon Estes wrote: A line has been crossed. To be compared to Hitler is wrong... not acceptable


If you'll read what I posted, you will see that I did not compare you to Hitler. Nor did I compare anyone else to Hitler. What I compared was the attitude that we need to restrict asylum seekers and refugees from south of the border from entering because "bad people" might be coming in with them to the same attitude that was exhibited in the US prior to and during most of WW2 about admitting Jews because of the "bad people" that might come in with them. There is no comparison of anyone or anything to Hitler. The comparison is current American attitude toward immigration with previous American attitude toward immigration.

There was no intention on my part to make a comparison to Hitler and if that wasn't as clear as you thought it should be, then I am certainly willing to apologize for the misunderstanding.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Tim Bonney » Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:38 pm

Jon, I hope you don't drop out. In re-reading the thread it appears to me that Sandy is comparing situations in history and not name calling.

It is very hard when the President talks positively about being nationalist and the GOP is even hesitant to censure a congressman from Iowa who is openly a nationalist and supports white supremacists not to start to make comparisons to other times in history when nationalism has led us down horrible paths.

This is far beyond the usual DNC/GOP back and forth. This is the potential highjacking of a major US party by the alt-right.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6034
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Rvaughn » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:02 pm

Interesting comments on immigration reform from a friend who usually opposes President Trump on every hand.
President has put most of his energy in lifting up the worse elements of the undocumented population (the murderers) as representative of the whole in order to deceive and turn Americans against a marginalized community by misrepresenting them. He did it again today, but then, he followed it up with a proposal that deserves consideration.
While there is much to disagree with in the President's proposal, when he took office my prayer was that God could use a nativist such as him to do the unexpected in immigration. A "Nixon in China" type moment.
I have been engaged in issues of immigration since 1999, travelling numerous times to D.C., to Austin, to local official's office, to numerous organizational meetings, giving many lectures and conferences. I have worked with the IAF/DIA, PICO/FIT, WDP, FIT, TOP, LULAC (just to name a few) to organize people for change in our nation. Continuing to pray that God will provide relief...
We need to make a change and change will require compromise.
For the President to commit to gathering bipartisan leadership biweekly to work on this, to open with relief to DACA and TPS families, I say let the negotiations begin. $5.4 billion for his "barrier," even if it is wasteful, would be worth every penny since a comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) that documents the non-criminal undocumented residents would result in billions more in revenue. Moreover, CIR could enable millions to not have to live in fear, to be employed up to their abilities rather than be limited in the cash economy, to enable sons and daughters visit their aging parents in their home countries and grandparents to get to hug and hold their grandchildren, and so many more economic and moral benefits.
Clearly, in this process President Trump may be as faithful and commitmented as he has been with his wives. However, at this point, I want our leaders to once again enter into negotiations with him. Open the government and let's all get to work as we seek a more perfect union.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby KeithE » Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:35 pm

Rvaughn wrote:Interesting comments on immigration reform from a friend who usually opposes President Trump on every hand.
President has put most of his energy in lifting up the worse elements of the undocumented population (the murderers) as representative of the whole in order to deceive and turn Americans against a marginalized community by misrepresenting them. He did it again today, but then, he followed it up with a proposal that deserves consideration.
While there is much to disagree with in the President's proposal, when he took office my prayer was that God could use a nativist such as him to do the unexpected in immigration. A "Nixon in China" type moment.
I have been engaged in issues of immigration since 1999, travelling numerous times to D.C., to Austin, to local official's office, to numerous organizational meetings, giving many lectures and conferences. I have worked with the IAF/DIA, PICO/FIT, WDP, FIT, TOP, LULAC (just to name a few) to organize people for change in our nation. Continuing to pray that God will provide relief...
We need to make a change and change will require compromise.
For the President to commit to gathering bipartisan leadership biweekly to work on this, to open with relief to DACA and TPS families, I say let the negotiations begin. $5.4 billion for his "barrier," even if it is wasteful, would be worth every penny since a comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) that documents the non-criminal undocumented residents would result in billions more in revenue. Moreover, CIR could enable millions to not have to live in fear, to be employed up to their abilities rather than be limited in the cash economy, to enable sons and daughters visit their aging parents in their home countries and grandparents to get to hug and hold their grandchildren, and so many more economic and moral benefits.
Clearly, in this process President Trump may be as faithful and commitmented as he has been with his wives. However, at this point, I want our leaders to once again enter into negotiations with him. Open the government and let's all get to work as we seek a more perfect union.

My sentiments pretty much exactly. A suitable first salvo from Trump. Pelosi’s first salvo was the passage of several keep open the government bills that McConnell merely ignored.

Pelosi’s before-the-talk putdowns were premature (but not totally inaccurate)
"a compilation of several previously rejected initiatives, each of which is unacceptable and in total, do not represent a good faith effort to restore certainty to people's lives.”


But her three line retort after-the-talk was correct - 1) there was no democratic involvement in the Trump “proposal”, 2) the temporary 3-year relief for DACAers and TPSers is inadequate, and 3) it did nothing to open the government. (Side note: there was no sympathizing with the furloughed in Trump’s speech)

I can support starting along this “proposal" path of ($800M for “humanitarian” aid, $805M for technical solutions and $5.7B ($5700M) for a 213 mile stretch of steel slats at strategic locations - all $ figures are over 5 years), 2250 new border agents and 75 new asylum judges (and open up the “metering”). Then every 6 months or so have honest assessments of what is working best (e.g. we will discover walls are scalable and easy to dig under) and readjust relative funding. All the while starting real discussions on CIR which may in a few years come to fruition but probably after someone else is in the WH (in Jan 2021 since Trump’s demagoguery will become more apparent).

I cannot support the tact of keeping much of government closed. Both sides must say together "open up the government" (even DHS funding) and then we can talk more. Those government functions are for the most part necessary; the government employees need to get back to work (with back pay, imo). The economy has been hurt enough already.

We must not let Trump think he was the “victor” here, since he will try increasingly harmful (even dangerous) political moves (to the people, to the environment, to our international relations, to the rule of law, ...), all the while moving to enrich himself in undercover ways.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8917
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: To build or not build a wall

Postby Dave Roberts » Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:35 pm

What concerns me about these officers is that they merely kick the can down the road three more years without resolving the legal status of either group. Trump's offer is only a postponement that resolves nothing.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7343
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Next

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests